Now here is your assignment. You have an Ipod that only holds 10 songs. These are the only 10 you can listen to for the next year. This is not a I have to be cool list. These are the only 10 songs you would hear for a whole year. These aren't the 10 greatest singles of all-time, just the 10 I would want to hear most right now.

In My Time of Dying (1975) - Many of Zeppelin's best work has been killed by Classic Rock radio stations in their desire to get the Led out. In My Time of Dying comes from the band's greatest work, Physical Graffiti. The song mixes the dirty blues sound that made them the biggest band in the world and adds an incredibly funky groove mixed in with Page's Eastern-influenced guitar playing. Despite being over 11 minutes long, the song never lags, as the group is completely in the pocket.

Fat Bottomed Girls/Bicycle Race (1978)- This might be cheating a bit, but these 2 songs were always played together on rock radio, like a follow-up to We Will Rock You/We are the Champions. How ahead of their time were Queen extolling the virtues of ample backsides? This was a couple decades before Sir-Mix-a-Lot and his other fellow rappers would offer up. Brian May's guitar sounds are really underrated, as the roughed up rockabilly sound propels Fat Bottomed Girls along. The companion piece, Bicycle Race is classic Queen, with stream of conscious-like lyrics are blended with rock musical choruses. Complete silly fun.

(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding (1979) - This songs fulfills my Costello-fix, my early punk/new wave fix, and gives me a little Nick Lowe as well. (He wrote it.) The lyrics are brilliant and Elvis shows a range of voice which conveys the great themes the song discusses.

Hghway to Hell (1979)- This is about the sleaziest rock song of all-time. It begins with a brilliantly simple guitar riff, followed by a just as simple and just as brilliant thud of the drums by Phil Rudd. Considering that Bon Scott would drink himself to death soon after, the lyrics of the song seem even more real. Highway to Hell builds into a final crescendo, after a Chuck Berry-like solo by Angus, with Scott ending the song with a sinister vocal reciting the title.

How Soon is Now? (1984) - I should begin by mentioning I'm not a huge Smith fan, but no song from the early stages of alternative rock knocks me out more than Nothing in Particular. (This is what I thought the song's title was for quite awhile.) The swirling, hypnotic guitars of Johnny Marr are as Paula Abdul would say---brilliant! The effeminate British vocals of Morrissey blend beautifully with the driving beat of the song. 24-years later, this one totally holds up on the radio.

Sign of the Times (1987) - I'm not sure any one artist in music history was hitting on all cylinders more than Prince was on Sign of the Times. Playing all the instruments on a song which blends funk, rock, soul, and rap into a seamless classic. The lyrics are a more story/documentary of what was happening in the world at the time. Prince uses a weary-sounding sing/rap style which conveys the message perfectly.

God (1994)- I've heard this song hundreds of times and it still resonates with me. It rocks hard, while Tori is at her most sensual. I dig the feminsist rant against how God sometimes you don't come through and asks if he needs a woman to look after you. Tori is the type of crazy-alternative chick I would fall for in college, even though I knew I didn't have the Bauhaus/goth-look she needed to really connect with her.

Blue (1995) - This is my favorite alt-country song of all-time. The harmonies are Beach Boys meets CSN, with a country tinge. Blue has a quality that few can do, as it radiates sunshine. Feel-good beauty.

Beautiful Day (2000) - No song encaptures the brilliance of the last great rock band on earth more than Beautiful Day. The chrismatic vocals of Bono, the ringing guitar fills by the Edge, and the great rhythm section of Mullen and Clayton are an energy force when they are at their best. On their amazing IMAX release, U2-3D, the song reachs even greater heights, as Beautiful Day is one of those magical musical moments that will always drive people to their feet.
NOTE: When I was looking on Youtube for this song, I ran across a guy named Kurt from World Idol, who does a cover of the song you have to see. He is one of the most unlikely rock singers I've ever seen, but he really nails every song I pulled up that he did on the show. Weird karaoke brilliance.

Lost (2007) - I have a romantic side. Who would have known? Sometimes you need a ballad and this is my current favorite from the best Canadian crooner of his generation. Michael Buble would wipe the floor with the competition if he would have went the American Idol route. Great vocals, great instincts, and the guy is O.C. delicious in the looks department. Have you ever wondered what a guy influenced by Frank Sinatra and George Michael would sound-like? Meet Buble. Sure he might be a bit too Manilow for some, but there are some songs I like by Barry, so I have no problem with that. Yeah, call me a puss. I can take it. Now I have to go and change my panties.
NOTE: All the videos for this song are really Lifetime Network, so I picked this one because it is a mix of good art and really bad art.

There is my list. A few things jump out. No music before 1975. I initially figured I would have a Beatles, Stones, Who, or CCR song, but they aren't what my ears would first go to at this point in my life. I almost went with Living for the City by Stevie Wonder over Queen, but I just liked having the fun of that double-shot single. No rap, as it just isn't something I really seek out much anymore. I was tempted to put a country song on the list, but the Jayhawks is close enough. Before you put up your lists, remember I'm not asking what you think are the 10 best singles of all-time, as only Sign of the Times would be on that list from what I have here.

List the 10 songs you would choose if these were the only ones you had to listen to for the next year.

And just so you can see what a professionally shot video looks like:

Give me a professional crew, an Avid machine, and a week and I could do that too. Amazing what me and Jenn can throw together with a Mac tho.

In case you might have missed it, during a recent downturn some White Sox player(s) took slump busting to a different level. They put a couple of blow-up dolls in their visiting clubhouse in Toronto. Well, it was no big deal to the beat writers from Chicago, as they realize that it was a pretty harmless joke. I mean as long as Bobby Jenks didn't jump on one, who was it going to hurt?

Well, it was newsworthy to the Toronto media and then became an issue for the Chicago Sun-Times. If you don't live in the Windy City, you are probably unaware of the bad blood between the paper and the Sox. Most of this stems from douchebag columnist Jay Mariotti. Mariotti is a person so vile that even Will Leitch and Buzz Bissinger could agree that he's a hack. Now I appreciate edgy writers who are willing to be contrarians, as I think it helps push the dialogue on issues in a different way. This is rarely what Mariotti does,though, as his general stance in putting together his column is who can I slam for the day, if they deserve it or not.

Mariotti seems to have a specific vendetta against all things owned by Jerry Reinsdorf, with the White Sox his favorite targets. Considering that Ozzie Guillen is the manager, this is a pretty easy mark, as Guillen is always offering up something to comment on. Most of the writers in Chicago realize that Ozzie is a fountain of copy. They also realize that he is a fun-loving guy, who grew up in a locker room, not an Ivy-League, human sensitivity lab. I would agree that Guillen crosses the line of good taste sometimes, but in a world where corporate interests generally determine that all public comment must be sanitized, it's refreshing to my ears to hear a guy who is willing to not just tip-toe up to the edge, but leap over it at times.

Located in Mariotti's latest commentary on Guillen included this comment. (I won't even link this garbage, as if you want to find it, go ahead and do it on your own time.)

I'm just wondering how he's still employed. If this was bad standup comedy, I'd understand why a trashy nightclub might hire him to humor drunks for $5.50 an hour.

Just another hack effort by Mariotti, throwing my profession under the CTA. I'm not about to claim that what I do for a living is on the level of being a doctor in a Children's Hospital, but I do know my trashy comedy leaves people with a lot better feeling than the one they get after finishing a Mariotti column---you know, having the need to scrub themselves down like a rookie porn star after doing her first scene with Ron Jeremy.

Even the worst standup comics, who as a group I generally don't defend, at least have to do one thing that Mariotti never does. They have to face their audience. This is the beef that many of his critics, and fellow journalists hate the most about the guy. Mariotti spends most of his time hidden away in his dirt-filled coffin, sticking his fangs in whatever victim he can suck the most blood out of---only leaving his lair occasionally to convalesce with the other vampires which appear on ESPN's Around the Horn.

The one up-shot that has happened from the dreaded blow-up doll event is that others in the media have put it in perspective. It has even created a fun little newspaper war of words, as some on the Tribune staff have called out the Sun-Times for their hypocrisy. My favorite was written by the Trib's Mike Downey. This is the beginning of his column.

• Naked Dancers: Peep Show, $20 for 1/2 Hour"

• X-Treme Body Massages with 'Hotties' "

• Hot, Wild, Fun—Blonde or Brunette?"

— Ads that ran in Wednesday's sports section of the Chicago Sun-Times.

Awwww, isn't it sweet of the Sun-Times to go to bat against Ozzie Guillen's bad language and the sexism of the White Sox?

It reminds me a little of the glory days when the greatest newspaper columnist I ever read, Mike Royko, would rail against the Trib and then the Sun-Times (after he switched sides). Newspapers are in a tough business climate. The best way they can stay relevant is to mix the hard news reporting that is so vital to our Republic, with opinion writers who are willing to push their readers with edgy content. It is a fine-line that the best columnists are able to deliver.

The buffoonish work of Mariotti might sell some papers, but I think hurts the paper's credibility with their readers. The bigger problem is Mariotti-types create dissension among his fellow employees, bringing a bad working atmosphere. While Mariotti's merits can be debated, he would seem to be a clubhouse cancer on the level of a Terrell Owens. It is a wicked irony that Mariotti is the newspaper writer version of the athletes he most attacks from his ivory tower.

Is it just me that sees the problem with Mariotti ripping the White Sox for creating some comedic relief from installing a couple blow-up dolls? Think about it. Mariotti and blow-up dolls have so much in common. The 2 biggest similarities they have are that they are  substitutes for the real thing and they both are filled with hot air.

Let's say I'm Walt Jocketty. I've got some World Series rings and a new job. I'm wondering, "hmm, how can I turn this thing around?" First, I might wonder if things are that bad. Yes, my minor league system's thin, but there's some help on the way. No, my major league team isn't playing up to potential, but there's not a really weak spot -- a significantly below average player -- on the starting roster.

One of the things I wouldnt do? Call Steve Phillips, the failed GM and ESPN know-it-all, and ask for his assistance. Unfortunately, he didn't wait to be asked:

1. TRADE JUNIOR : Phillips suggests Griffey (who has full no trade) should go to the White Sox in return for Josh Fields, then call up Jay Bruce. Ok. This isn't insane. I'm not sure Kenny Williams wants Griffey or more importantly needs Griffey or if Griffey would go there. Junior has been clear that he would only allow a trade to go to a potential champion. The White Sox? Not so much. The confusion between GM and CF might be an issue as well.

2. DUNN DEAL : Ok, trade Adam Dunn. I'll buy this idea, but in return, Phillips is suggesting asking for Matt Cain, Adam Lind AND Dustin McGowan, or Cliff Lee AND Franklin Gutierrez. Are you serious? There's not a chance that the slow kid in the fantasy league would make this deal, let alone one of those GMs. Not even JP Ricciardi! This is just a travesty and reminds us why Phillips is out of a job. Dunn's value is much closer to that of Kenny Lofton than Mark Teixeira.

3. BYE, BYE BRONSON : Phillips thinks Bronson Arroyo is toast, but that several teams like Texas or Milwaukee would give up a couple prospects for said crostini. Umm, no. At best, Arroyo's going to go somewhere big market to fill in at the back end of the rotation and the Reds will have to eat much of the deal. I'm not sure Jocketty should make this move and remove some flexibility, let alone do it with no backup plan aside from Homer Bailey.

4. CALL HANK : I'll just lay out what Phillips does - Jeremy Affeldt and Jared Burton for Phil Hughes. The same Phil Hughes that the Yankees wouldn't trade for Santana. The same Phil Hughes that's the surest thing of the four young Yankees pitching prospects despite some injuries. "Castellini and Hank will love it!" he says. Good lord, I'm sure Castellini would. He'd like a trade of a couple replacement level guys for a future ace, but who wouldn't? This isn't even good stuff if he'd initially made a list of three things and had to come up with a fourth on the fly. John Kruk would laugh at this if he could read.

5. SHORT CUT: Freel for Scott Proctor. It's not a horrible deal, but it seems a bit superfluous. Proctor, I guess, ends up in the Jared Burton role where he'd be a slight upgrade, if a bit more expensive.

Now, I'm no former GM, but if I'm Walt Jocketty in this exercise, I'm doing one thing -- changing my cell number and telling my secretary not to take any calls from Bristol, then going about my business.

I will be headlining at Comedy Comedy located in the Walter Payton Roundhouse entertainment complex in Aurora, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. If you would like to get 2 for 1 tix for Thursday or Friday, email me at scott@scottlongonline.com

Look forward to seeing you there.

Roger Ebert is doing a blog. I didn't know until one of my favorite bloggers, John Gruber, mentioned it. The first post I read was the above link, riffing on a movie version of the primary season. Like much of Ebert's thoughts and writings, I found it brilliant.

Then I wondered. Ebert's always been very good and very entertaining. He crossed over to television without problem despite a face for print (*wink*), so making a shift to the unfettered blog-style shouldn't surprise me. I look forward to reading more when I have a chance and he's definitely going in my bookmarks. But the real wondering is this: was Ebert 'held back' by the newspaper format or even the TV segment?

Not to belabor the man as point, but Buzz Bissinger made the shift from newspaper reporter to columnist to feature writer and finally to books. Each time, he got more "inches." It's a pretty classical, Darwinian progression. You could say then that the original format held him back. He was able to succeed enough to get to the next step, but I'm sure there are some out there that couldn't handle the shorter format. Joe Posnanski also followed this model, but what about Aaron Gleeman? Here's one of the most successful writers of the new generation, a guy who famously couldn't get a job on his school's newspaper, but now has a national seat. What if Gleeman had gotten the job and couldn't write "inside the box"?

You can look around the web and see the free use of space opening up things. From Trent Rosencrans' liveblogs to Amalie Benjamin's lineup posts, we're seeing things that newspapers - the physical, paper product - can't do for various reasons. Sure, for every one of the positive examples, there's probably a handful of poorly written, crass, or simply uninformative blog out there to match it, but you click past it. You ignore it. You go back to the ones that are good.

Now I can only wonder ... how is the web holding us back?

- * - * -

As I wrote this, my spider pulled in a post from Chris Needham*. Needham's leaving blogging, following in the path of guys I've read regularly like Brian Gunn, Ed Cossette, and others. Someone will replace him, just as Larry Borowsky became my go-to Cards guy (though admittedly, the Cards' beat is covered by great writers.) I continue to believe that the currency of the blogosphere is feedback. I should dig through the archives to find my original piece about this, but the gist was that bloggers need feedback, whether that's attention (comments, links, hits), influence, or money. I'll wish Needham luck in whatever he chooses to do next.

* I still cling to the belief that we should refer to blogs by their author, not by their URL or randomly selected title. "Did you read Will Leitch's latest piece in GQ?" makes sense in the real world, so why not carry that on if the writer and his/her viewpoint is the important thing?

Mark Twain famously said that "he never let his schooling get in the way of his education." A less known quote from the less impugned Clemens is that a "self-taught man seldom knows anything accurately." That's all changing through one of the most amazing and yet little known features introduced by a well-known company: iTunes U.

Is the iPod an educational tool? Yes, if you use it well. My time at college was ... mis-spent, we'll say. I learned far more outside the classroom than in, but that holds true for most things and I'll guess most people. We'll leave my educational malpractice out of this and focus on the idea of using technology to help yourself and help the world. Over the past few weeks since discovering this free service, I've listened to Norman Mailer discuss writing, an archaeologist lecture about his years spent trying to discover Hannibal's route over the alps, and economists discussing the impact of the Starbucks economy.

Does it help me to know that the Phoenicians were the founders of Carthage? Not really, but it's an interesting fact. What's much more interesting is that in an hour, I heard from a man at Stanford discussing archaeology - something I know little or nothing about and frankly have little or no interest in - in a manner that held my attention. For free. On my iPod while I sit on the deck or sit here writing.

The best teachers in the world are a click away, making me wonder how long before lesser universities have to address this shift and disintermediation. While the University of Phoenix was the first Christensonian disruptor, they've gone for a populist, volume-oriented model over the elitist model I think will prevail. Given the chance to hear the best lecturers and researchers and the inevitable shift to video, on-demand, or livecasts, the idea of paying big bucks to sit in a room of bored teenagers pretending to listen to a graduate assistant while chatting on Facebook loses some sway.

Right now, college is the "safe choice" for people and like college, the online elite model won't work for everyone, but it's a much more inspiring ideal. Imagine a high school where a world-class chemist is teaching chemistry or that an award winning teacher is in every classroom. With this type of technology, it's within reach. In a location-based economy, this high school might have the best teacher or an advantage of money or location, but in a technology-based economy, every school can take the best teacher and have them in their classroom virtually. It's much more cost-effective to take the top 1% of teachers and give them 99% of the money, while hiring monitors to handle the in-person tasks that schools have. There's clearly a lower limit on this approach; I'm not sure it works with kindergarteners, though I'm not sure it doesn't. Maybe Barney has a use after all.

For now, I'd just invite everyone to check out the amazing array of free content on iTunes U. Steve Jobs never enters a market unless he's going to change it and I think he might really be on to another world changing idea here.

Now, how do I get the Tufts class on sabermetrics available for download or get Prospectus University started?

* Costco had a three pound bag of New Guinea coffee and it's phenomenal. I'm a HUGE fan of Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee, but the quality has gone steadily downhill over the last decade. I'm not sure why, but at the same time, New Guinea has gone up. It's already similar - New Guinea's coffee stock came from Blue Mountain seeds - but the consistency and the variety have both been raised (which seems odd, that pair.) Peet's New Guinea is the class of the field, but any is darn good and a third or less of the cost of JBM.

* MLB.com's Mosaic is just a sick piece of technology. At some points, it gets a bit slow, but even on my Air with craptastic Comcast service, the thing just works. I'd love to see the player alerts -- does anyone use those? -- but don't due to some complex behind-the-scenes issues. I'm excited about the Baseball Network, but I still think the future is going to be the online, near-on-demand video. If Apple really wants to get AppleTV into living rooms, they should quit worrying about movies and figure out how to stream MLB.com and other online content to my big TV.

* I'm surprised at the lack of mainstream coverage of the Costas Now incident. One writer I spoke to about it said that the reaction isn't going to be at the writer level, but the editor level. One other writer made an interesting point in that the online medium might be relying too much on links. I love Deadspin and they do original content, but most of their content is actually comment. Funny, well written comment, but it's the exception. I have no doubt that Will Leitch or the FJM guys or hundreds of others could do their own content and build an audience. I just don't think it would be as big. Honestly, the same could be said about most blogs or even sites like Drudge Report, so this isn't a sports thing.

* Do you know how cool it is to pick up the phone and the voice on the other end is Bob Costas? It's cool. Almost as cool as hearing Harry Kalas.

* One MLB team is trying to put together an ISO-style "player instruction system." I'm curious to see how this comes out. More than a "Dodger Way", I'm not sure this will work. Coaching is somewhere between a mystical personality cult and trial-and-error tweaking when it comes to both hitting and pitching. It's worse for infield -- Ron Washington made his reputation on his infield coaching and yet I have no idea whatsoever what his reputation was made on, aside from Eric Chavez being very good. I'm not saying he's not, just that no one -- for any coach -- seems to have any replicable way of extending the advantage beyond keeping the guy on the payroll.

* I'm growing more and more convinced that online video doesn't work because most people do their surfing at work. I have no idea how to overcome that currently, though my guess is that as the iPhone and other phone-style connected devices get more powerful, we'll use those more than the company PC. At that point, bandwidth becomes an issue again.

* Letterman is doing Magician Week on his show. I still completely geek out for magic. Close up magic remains my favorite though I will admit that I really want to see the Criss Angel/Cirque du Soleil show in Vegas as well as seeing Hans Klok, who's show is supposed to open at Planet Hollywood.

* Hearing that the food in the new Palazzo is a disappointment. Charlie Trotter's place just doesn't seem to translate to Vegas, Emeril's running out of ideas, and while Mario Batali's steakhouse is solid, it's expensive. (Yes, everything's expensive in Vegas, but I mean it in a value sense. Craftsteak is expensive, but you won't bat an eye after the quality and service you get.) I'm still very curious what food will go in City Center, but haven't heard any news.

* An absolute flood of great music out right now ... Elvis Costello's new record - yes, record, since it's only on vinyl - is perhaps his best work since Blood & Chocolate. New bands like Helio Sequence and M83's John Hughes homage give me some hope while REM , Roots, and Raconteurs prove that there's more life in existing acts. Hammock releases tomorrow, Coldplay's single is out with an album on the horizon, so 08 is shaping up to be a much better music year than 07 was.

* While a Barack Obama candidacy held the promise of a post-racial, post-Atwater politics, I'm not sure that an Obama loss won't be a bigger setback. The gulf between black and white, men and women, young and old is just massive right now and no one seems able to bridge it. I'm not panicked about the process yet, but I'll maintain my near-nihilistic cynicism. While I want to be an Obama supporter, the fact that he keeps taking punches without throwing them really confuses me. He can't be what he wants to be if he does it, which makes for an interesting dynamic. A ruthless attack dog as VP is the perfect fit, but I can't imagine Hillary Clinton wanting that role. Obama has the reverse McCain VP problem -- he needs a Cheney (minus the evil, we hope.)

* If Clayton Kershaw is available in your league, grab him. Scouts that have seen him are near-orgasmic in a way I haven't heard for anyone.

* Lost is getting more and more complex. The writers are boxing themselves in with things I only hope won't take a Tommy Westphall to save them.

* What bizarre circumstances led to the Brewers being short of pitching and the Cardinals having a "surplus?"

There was a time in the late 90's where the WWF (as it was then) had perfected the introduction. Hot, driving music that was instantly identifiable, whether it was the breaking glass of Steve Austin, the droning beat that led out the Undertaker, or any of Mick Foley's many iterations, with my favorite being the car-crash at the start of "Mankind"'s open.

Baseball never got really good at it. "Enter Sandman" for Mariano Rivera and "Hell's Bells" for Trevor Hoffman was about as good as it got. Neither of them was nearly as good as the "Wild Thing" entrance for Ricky Vaughn in Major League either. I'm not sure why it never got more dramatic; maybe it's because baseball is a game of failure and having a closer come in to a dramatic setup might make a blown save all the worse. If Jose Reyes can get yelled at about complicated celebration handslaps, I can't imagine what someone might get for a video piece and a smoke machine.

So, if you were a closer -- or a hitter -- what would your entrance music be and why? And also, a friend of mine who is a major leaguer was recently asked to pick a tune for when he comes to the plate. He's not much of a music fan and is looking for suggestions. Hit the comments ...

Recently I was booked to perform in a small Midwestern city which has had a serious economic downturn because of a loss of automotive-related plant closings. All the booking agent told me was that the one-night show would take place in a rowdy bar. Well, when I pulled up to the venue, I realized that the agent had failed to mention one thing. It was a strip joint. And don't think it was a Gentleman's Club. This was the kind of place where not even the owner referred to his employees as dancers or entertainers, they were strippers.

Now as most of you realize, I am not a prude, so no big deal. This wasn't even my first titty bar rodeo, as early in my career I had set up a show at a more ritzy nudie club. My idea was to do an old-time burlesque show, with myself performing comedy in-between the girls. The show actually went really well, as many friends of mine who claimed they couldn't come out to see me before, somehow were able to make this show. I'm sure getting away for the night went something like this.

(To girlfriend/wife): Hey honey, I'm going to see Scott Long do comedy....Nah, don't worry about coming along, I'm just going to support him. I wouldn't want to put you through his act....Oh and if you don't mind, can I grab some money our of your purse. I'm a little short on cash....No, I don't need a twenty, I will just grab whatever ones you have....Love you, don't wait up.

After the success of my first show, the owner wanted me to do another. This one did not go as well, as it had gotten out where I'd done the last show and I had to find a different group of people to help support me. This was a much smaller group who were made up of comics. If you weren't aware, most comics do not laugh much at other comic's jokes and actually get a perverse pleasure watching a fellow comic bomb. There was plenty of that going on, as the audience there seemed to have no idea what was going on and why this idiot was up on-stage cutting into their time oogling naked broads. I get that they were just trying to escape their pathetic lives one table dance at a time. I will admit I came into this event a bit too confident after my initial success, as I had hatched what I thought would be a sure-fire comedy bit. My final appearance for the night, I came out in a pair of dockers and a cardigan sweater. Telling them that I was the top children's host/adult entertainer in the world, I had the DJ begin playing the Mr.Roger's Neighborhood theme, while I proceeded to undress. I know, I know, but it seemed like a funny idea at the time. The success of a bit is often incumbent on the audience and this wasn't the right one for ths. I"m not sure where the right one is located, but I can promise I have no interest trying specific act again to find out. After my shirt came off, my nipples were encased in pasies, with attached tassles that I began to twirl. I wasn't exactly Gypsy Rose Lee, but I was definitely giving it my all. All I can say is thank God, Jesus, Buddah, etc. that there wasn't camera phones or Youtube at the time, as I would have had my Michael RIchards moment.

So this was my past. The show a couple weeks back was less momentous, as there were no dancers on the bill. You see, the economic downturn had impacted the strip clubs bottom line (yeah, I realize) and so the owner decided to open up on the sabbath and bring comedy to his one-stage room with a poll sitting right in front of the mic stand. It is here where we get into economics. The closing of the factories had impacted a lot of the town, but probably not one industry more than the discretionary income for tuckin' bucks. The downward spiral continued, as since the strippers were making less money, they left for bigger riches in more high dollar cities. The owner admitted to me that this had brought down the quality of talent he could provide. Talk about the ultimate ugly cycle. Now no matter how much he might gain in the short term from promoting the idea of use your government stimulus check to do some real stimulating, I'm aftraid in the long-term things look pretty bleak for this establishment. Maybe enough attractive stay-at-home MILF's will be forced to help their household income and shake their moneymakers part-time on-stage, but imy guess it will be too late by then to save my new friend's club.

Things are really bad in the Industrial Midwest and I just don't see much help on its way. Maybe the government should rethink its economic indicators which focus on consumer goods. It might just be that chicks dancing to Motley Crue songs are the biggest determining factor on if the economy is boom or bust. Bust might just be the keyword, as if a stripper can afford to invest in iimplants, things are probably going well. Inflating keeps away inflation?

(Will Carroll and I were working on pieces about the same subject and just before I decided to post this one, I noticed he had beat me to it. I suggest you read his offering that is below mine. Since he knows both the participants, he gives great insight. Mine is more of your typical blogger read and react. We don't have opposite views on the subject, but do have some differing points.)

After careful study, I realize that I am the exact connecting piece between mainstream media and the blogging world. I grew up delivering newspapers, reading them from front to back, and dreaming of becoming a columnist. I went to college to study journalism, tried giving free-lance writing a go, and then...gave up this dream because I had no interest in climbing a ladder which started with covering high school sports. I have an immense respect for the reporter who is just interested in delivering the basic facts of the event. I learned imy 5 W's and a H, but I always wanted to explore my creativity and had the narcissistic desire to share my opinion, if people wanted it or not. I decided to become a standup comedian...a job where it is all about me. Look, I've never claimed I don't have attention issues.

While my main focus became coming up with funny, edgy material thaet makes people laugh, I never gave up my sports focus. I've regularly appeared on local and national syndicated radio shows. I've written comedy sketches for TV. I never felt a great sense of creative freedom, though, until I started blogging. It is at the Juice Blog where I can offer up my thoughts, without having corporate management types determining what I will write about. While I am always interested in entertaining my audience here, I don't have to mix in some lowest common demoninator material like I do in my standup. I'm not saying I don't offer up LCD stuff here, but I do solely because it makes me laugh. Blogging is the most freeing creative exercise there is.

With these credentials, I believe I am the perfect person to mediate the slamdown that happened on HBO between Buzz Bissinger and Will Leitch. If you haven't seen the event moderated by Bob Costas, I suggest you watch it first. OK.....and your back. Let me begin by saying that I happen to agree with most of what Bissinger said. Most blogs don't provide insightful writing, instead just offering up a snarky takes on information that they generally got from MSM. Blogs are often more like what you get from a caller on a sports talkshow or the guy sitting at the corner bar. I would argue that baseball blogs are the top in their field because so many do it because they are sabermetrically-driven. As fanatical as this group can be, they also happen to be usually highly-intelligent, so there is little tabloid journalism involved.

Will Leitch is actually one of the best writers that has come out of the blogging world, which is why he now contributes work to the MSM, as well. Leitch also has his name on the byline, so he can't hide behind a moniker, which as I've addressed before I think offers crediblility to your work. One problem with Leitch representing the blogosphere is that his site is more of an entertainment site than a blog. Deadspin to me is kind of like a TMZ for sports, with a Daily Show satirical view of its proceedings. Bissinger (and Costas) went on the attack against blogs using the comments section of Deadspin. That was unfair, as smearing Deadspin or other blogs for what a few readers offer misses the mark. At Baseball Toaster there is a policing of what is offered up and since our readership is much smaller, we rarely have some idiot post a comment that needs to be pulled.

A lot of people in the blogosphere have been slamming Buzz, but I thought it was great that he went postal. Truthfully, his performance defending old media was very new media. It was like he was Bob Knight and Jay Mariotti all thrown into one personality. Considering that these are 2 of the people I loathe the most, it is weird that I'm complimenting the guy, but the MSM usually is defended by David Brooks-types, so it was fun to hear Bissinger offer up the same shots, but in an aggressively profane style. Bissinger has written 3 of the best non-fiction books of the past couple of decades. This is an important point, as Bissinger is an author. He is not writing a column for a newspaper. He isn't as limited by newpaper editors or corporate interests like MSM is. When he writes a book like Friday Night Lights, Bissinger doesn't have to continue to cover the Odessa, TX scene every Friday night. Outside of the considerable legwork he does in reseach and the large bonus of having a top-notch editor help him craft his art, Bissinger has more in common with bloggers than MSM-types, when it comes to the freedom he has.

There is a place for both MSM and the blogosphere, just like there is a place for both the New York Times and the New York Post or C-Span and E! Entertainment. I know many bloggers and their readers take some kind of perverse glee in the destruction of newspapers. This is short-sighted, as most of the info they get to write their read and reacts comes from newspapers. The transitional period we are in of mostly commentary and little hard-nosed reporting does not help the culture. If ths was Bissinger's ultimate point, he was right and I'm sure it was something that Leitch would have agreed with. I welcome Bissinger to read most of the stuff that gets written here at Baseball Toaster, as I believe it is some of the best blogging that is offered up on the web. My guess is outside of some of the stuff I offer up at the Juice Blog, it would give him a more hopeful attitude about the concept of blogs.

Warning: Gratuitous Cursing!

Everyone on the fucking interwebs has had a chance to say their piece on the Costas Now panel discussion that saw Will Leitch (full disclosure: he's one of my friends, though we've never actually met, and we've written together) attacked by both Buzz Bissinger (full disclosure:he's an asshat of epic proportions and someone I have a long history with) and by Bob Costas. Bissinger was more overt, flailing his "notes" and cursing as much as Will ever does in a Deadspin post. It was Costas, who's made his disdain for blogs known, who did the more subtle placement of the dagger.

On the heels of the Clemens-McCready story, of the widespread reporting of Brian McNamee's stored garbage, of Alex Rodriguez's stalking which resulted in pictures of him and his swingin' pal, and countless others, Costas had the gall to ask Will if he'd go through someone's garbage. Braylon Edwards, who at least doesn't hide behind the stanchions, said it was wrong to post pictures of athletes doing stupid things. Here's the thought -- if you know that camera phones are everywhere, how about not doing something you don't want pictured?

One player I spoke to recently took things a step further. He noted that a club he frequents now requires patrons to "check" their cellphones at the door. The place is pretty popular with athletes and celebs. I figure this will be a growing trend at those high-end clubs, though I probably still can't get in.

Will brought up a great point. Matt Leinart is young, rich and good looking. He's drinking beers and hanging out in the hot tub with hot chicks. Good for him. He's not drinking and driving as far as I can tell. He's doing a beer bong, not a line of blow. I've been out recently and put a few more drinks into me than I should. If someone had pictures, I'd probably laugh, but I wouldn't hate that they were out there. Someone's going to have to pull a Barkley and remind people that if you're going to make athletes your role models, you might be disappointed when you find out their just human.

Minor off-topic: The other night on ABC's nightly newscast, they covered the "Miley Cyrus" controversy without once mentioning that they were owned by Disney, the company that created Cyrus and has a long term deal with Annie Liebowitz. Are you kidding me? How do you not at least mention this? ABC has done more damage to their journalistic credentials over the last month than Big Daddy Drew.

Update on this ... it was pointed out to me that Bissinger and Costas worked on a book together. I haven't read it, but it should have been disclosed. As well, Bissinger wrote the screenplay for "Shattered Glass." I think that fact is key here and might color much of his commentary on journalism.

As we see blogs growing and newspapers dying, I just laugh. We've had recent news that Murray Chass is being bought out by the NY Times and that Gordon Edes is headed from the Boston Globe to Yahoo. Is Edes' writing any less readable or informative at Yahoo than it was at the Globe? I read Peter Abraham's blog every single day and unless I go look it up, I have no idea whatsoever what newspaper he writes for. Kat O'Brien was a must-read for me on the Rangers and now she's a must read on the Yankees. I not only don't care what paper she writes for, I don't even care what TEAM she writes about. I read a ton of writers every day and I don't even get my local paper delivered. I'll read Evan Grant, T.R. Sullivan, and Jamey Newberg when I want to know about the Rangers. They're three writers in different mediums with different viewpoints -- and that's what I want!

For me, the democratization of the internet just allows the opportunity. Will's point about building readership was strong, but building credibility is an even harder thing. Will's had a hard time with that because he's willing to run things that don't meet the typical standards, such as the Albert Pujols connection to the Jason Grimsley story. Fact is, I was one of Will's sources on that, but he took the heat. I gave it to Will because I couldn't get a third independent source. I know now it's because the base information I was working with was incorrect.

But guess what -- factchecking wouldn't have stopped that any more than Buzz Bissinger's completely infactual article on pitch counts that ran in the NY Times. I've written for that same publication -- with Will Leitch! The irony! -- and know how they work. Bissinger made claims about pitch counts, pitcher age, and medical information that was such a leap as to be as out of touch with reality as he was out of touch with sanity and decorum on HBO's panel.

Several years ago, I tried to organize an Internet-based BBWAA. It was a wrongheaded idea, because it's not needed. Instead of artificial constructs, modern journalism is based on merit. If a writer comes from a newspaper, a blog, or something in between like MLB.com or FanHouse, he'll get an audience if he's credible, talented, and informative. If he's not, he'll end up passed over and the blog will die. How many flash in the pans have we seen? Even the really good ones -- Brian Gunn, I'm looking at you -- can fade for various reasons. Just because we don't have a membership card or press box access doesn't make me feel like less of a colleague with Will Leitch, Ken Tremendous, Alex Belth, or Eric Seidman.

But I also feel like a colleague of Matthew Leach, Joe Posnanski, Jeff Passan, and Peter Gammons. They're all great writers, guys I aspire to match, and guys who are just one click away from me. On Ballbug, we're all equal, the way it should be.

HBO does an amazing job with sports coverage. The Costas Now show was done in a way I can't imagine any other organization doing it. While I feel they put Will Leitch in a near-impossible situation (almost as bad as the one Braylon Edwards was in!), he came out of it stronger. The best response is not flailing around on the net -- though the lack of discussion by Bissinger's peers is intriguing -- but watching the tape and seeing how Will acted in the face of what was, I think, supposed to be a firing line.

He made us proud. Now let's do the same by doing good work in whatever fucking form we choose.

Update: Bob Costas called me and had a long, off-record discussion about this situation. While I can't discuss the content, he came off as he usually does -- smart, classy, and open-minded. On the heels of that conversation, I want to clarify my statement about Costas. The conflict was clearly produced, but wasn't a "setup" or "ambush." You put people in the situation and hope that something happens. It clearly did and that's the medium - not right or wrong.

"America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between." - Oscar Wilde.

Wikipedia defines decadence with ... well, you read it. To me, decadence is a nice description of the finer things in life, the ones that you can't or shouldn't do every day, but the experience of which adds a richness. We don't eat nightly at the finest restaurants, but there's some organic avocados and a recipe for guacamole. We don't have a case of Bordeaux in the cellar, but there's a nice Spanish Grenacha that will go well with the guac. There's a VW, not a Bugatti in the driveway and one turbo is enough. I am not, nor do I aspire to be, Paris Hilton or one of her friends.

Life is to be lived, to be experienced and savored. Over the last six months, I've spent far too much time wondering why my mother's death seemed so meaningless. I have visions of the end, but few from the good times. I do, however, remember taking her on the last Mother's day she had to Sullivan's, a steakhouse. She didn't really care for steakhouses and would never have gone had I not virtually required it. She dressed up a bit and if you didn't know the cancer was eating her away, you wouldn't have known it. She smiled. She ate the prime rib, rare, and never gave any indication that she was ill. Today nearly a year later, I know that it's that memory that will hold while the sight of her sliding away in her hospital bed will fade.

One special occasion is simply not enough. Birthdays and anniversaries don't happen often enough and every day is special. Is it decadent to have fresh avocados delivered to my home in the hopes that I can fashion some guacamole? Yes, yes it is. I'm still looking forward to trying that out. Decadent to spend a couple dollars extra to have the grass-fed, dry-aged steak or to drink the microbrew from my local tavern rather than the swill normally called beer? Yes, yes it is. Johnny Walker is good enough to drink and to enjoy, but a Macallan 18 is decadent enough to be needful. My MacBook Air is two pounds lighter than my old MacBook. Worth it? To me, yes.

It's not about being the smartest or the richest, about the latest gadget or the newest trend. Decadence is about the experience. Crash Davis reminded Nook LaLoosh that he didn't need a quadraphone Blaupunkt, but there's nothing wrong with having it once you have the curveball. Your decadence might be leaping out of a plane, surfing in Hawaii, or finding out how a $4,000 hooker earns her pay. Mine isn't, but there's nothing inherently wrong with yours, aside from the questionable legality and moral issues of the last one. You might disagree on the feeling I get dropping the top and driving, of sliding the virtual switch on the iPhone, or of anything I find decadent, but it's the personal experience.

You might not like my cigar. You might see me sitting in the corner with a beer, watching the game and talking too loudly and rightly think me obnoxious, but just politely tell me to dial it back a bit; you deserve your own enjoyment too. Just don't tell me I'm wrong just because we have different ways of experiencing things. Simple decadence is not something to be looked down on. You can use whatever terms you want, have whatever experience you want, and find your own path to fulfillment. I'm not an ascetic and my inner Buddha hasn't expressed itself yet. I can't stand silence or even quiet. I will look on things with lust and admiration. I will smile at the pretty girl. I will have a cool bluesman nickname. I'll help the old lady across the street. I'll scalp tickets to get the good seats. I will tip well for good service and very well for great service. I will pay extra to taste the ham that only ate acorns. I will wear a Sea Island cotton shirt for no other reason than James Bond did. I can pronounce Balenciaga. I'll always ask for the free upgrade.

Napoleon Solo once said he had an "elegant air of decadence." I want people to say that about me, admiringly, not grudgingly. I will live the life my parents dreamed I would.

My guess is that those who gravitate towards writing blogs are politically similar to those who are journalists or those who have chosen to go into to into the entertainment field. (actors, screenwriters, musicians, etc.) When you choose to go into a creative field, I don't think it's a stretch to say that you are someone with a large ego---someone who thinks that their talents need to be consumed by a larger audience. By being filled with such an ego, these creative types are less likely to want to be part of a large group or subscribe to some type of religious or political dogma. When you are of the persuasion I listed in the sentence before, you are usually pretty liberal politically.

I have come to these conclusions because it not only seems to be a pretty logical step, but also because I fit the hypothesis I have offered up. Where I differ with most of my creative, outsider types is that I have not fallen in love with the candidacy of Barack Obama. Before I get into why I haven't fully embraced him, let me discuss how I believe the majority of the blogosphere, mainstream media, and Hollywood left has given Obama a mostly free-ride during his meteoric rise.

There has been a steady clamor from the traditional and non-traditional media that Hillary Clinton has run a bad campaign. I disagree, as Barack Obama appeals almost perfectly to the 3 largest groups of Democratic primary voters. Far-left liberals, White elites, and Blacks. The first 2 groups have always had a tortured relationship with the Clinton's, as Bill's Presidency was marked by many moderate politcal positions. Along comes Barack Obama, a Black candidate for President who can assuage the White guilt for the first 2 groups, while nearly getting almost every tally from Black voters. Considering that these 3 groups are the most powerful blocs on the state and national level, it is not surprising that Obama has dominated the states that have caucuses.

The 2008 Democratic campaign started off perfectly for Obama, as Iowa is a caucus state which borders Illinois. It is not a state like most in the Midwest, which is economically-driven by manufacturing jobs and thus it's economy isn't doing that badly, as Ethanol has been a big boon for Iowa coffers. Obama also had the advantage of having John Edwards in the race, at the time, who I think took more voters away from Hillary. (I say this because the majority of populist voters have went Clinton's way since Edwards dropped out of the race.) When Obama won so decisively in Iowa and Hillary finished 3rd, it was a sign to Black voters that if he could dominate in a lily-White state, he could win the Democratic nomination. After Iowa, Hillary's support in the Black community went in free-fall, to the point now where Hillary is getting voting totals from Blacks like Dubya received versus Kerry in 2004.

The mainstream and non-mainstream media has spent most of the Democratic campaign being much tougher on Hillary. I understand this, as she was seen pretty invincible by the political experts and in the role of front-runner, you generally will take the most shots. Not until the race was for almost over, Ohio, did the mainstream press start to really dig into Obama's past and expose some issues about him that will definitely be key facets of the General campaign. Before this though, the MSM pundits and blogosphere spent most of it's time ripping the Clinton's for running a horrible campaign.

Ever since the first time the topic of would Hillary Clinton end up being the next President, I was always of the opinion that she couldn't win the General election. I just never thought she was likable enough and had too high of negatives. At the beginning of the race for the Democratic nomination, I was an Edwards supporter, as I felt he spoke most honestly about the issues I care about and was the candidate who I thought could most easily win the General. Considering the makeup of voters in the Democratic primary/caucus, he stood no chance against the well-funded campaigns he lost to, though. When Edwards bowed out, my super-delegate vote window reopened.

Obviously, Obama is the far superior speaker, but I have been impressed for the most part in the way Hillary has stayed within herself, rarely succumbing to the natural reaction at political rallies of raising her voice over a cheering crowd. (Better known as the Dean-scream.) Hillary is at her most likable when she smiles and offers up her cackle for a laugh, as it humanizes her and makes her seem less like the ice queen she has been portrayed as. Sure the whole beer and shot appearance she made in NW Indiana recently seemed less than genuine, but I think it was a positive for her, as for a core group of voters it made her appear less like an elitist. I know this stuff shouldn't matter, but just like seeing Obama fail so miserably bowling, it does make an unconscious impression on undecided voters. Considering that Hillary and Obama have very few policy differences, these type of personal qualities mean a lot more than you might hope they do.

Until Saturday Night Live did their debate parody of Tim Russert and Brian Williams fawning all over Obama and being much tougher on Hillary, there was little discussion of how much of free-ride Obama had gotten during this campaign. Still, the majority of the political blogosphere made little of it and nothing like how apeshit they went when Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopolous went hard at Obama. The liberal left doesn't have someone with the power of a Limbaugh or Hannity, but the closest they do have are Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Arianna Huffington, Markos Mousilitas (Daily Kos), Air America radio hosts, etc. All of them have been strongly supporting Obama since his Iowa primary victory. I can't name one major political pundit who has publicly supported Hillary. They have used many of the same arguments against the Clinton's that the right-wing conspiracy types did in the past. It has been really amazing to me that they have been this strident in their support and condemnation of the Clinton's, especially since the 2 candidates policies are practically the same.

These liberal media figures have claimed that the Clinton's have run a dirty campaign against Obama. This is where I strongly disagree. Considering how close the race has been and what is at stake, I think the tone has been mild. This is where the political correctness of the Left really hurts the Democratic party. When Bill Clinton mentioned after the South Carolina primary that Jesse Jackson had won it in the past, it was a legitimate point. The reason Obama won the state was because of Black voters. Sure Obama has won the majority of states, but I think there is a legitimate argument to be made that his victories have come in states like South Carolina where the Dems have little chance of winning. Considering that John McCain has appealed greatly to moderate voters in the past, states like Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida will be even more important than usual.

Obama's detached style is cool to the hipsters, but for people in the Industrial Midwest, who have seen there standard of living plummet, it has a hard time registering. Despite her claims to the contrary, it is hard to see how Hillary will really try to fix the problems of free-trade agreements considering that it was her husband's administration who were their biggest champions in the Democratic party. Even with this fact on his side, populist voters have shunned Obama for the most part as he just doesn't offer up much in the way of concrete plans on the subject. If you like it or not, these type voters will determine who become President. They have went strongly for Hillary, in almost every key swing state. I believe this has happened because despite the NAFTA-like agreements the Clinton administration pushed through, 1992-2000 was a lot better time for the middle-class than what they have experienced over the last 8 years.

The biggest joke to me has been the concept that Bill Clinton has hurt Hillary's campaign. Let's first establish that major reason she is a Senator and the only reason she was the Democratic front-runner for this election was because she was married to Bill. I've always thought of the Clinton's with this analogy. Have you ever had a party and when you were considering who to invite you were on the fence in inviting a couple because let's say the guy was the life of the party, but if you wanted him there, you had to take his not so fun wife as well. This is how I've always looked at the Clinton's. I always respected Hillary's intellect, but not until the past couple of months did I see much human warmth. Bill Clinton has gotten Hillary to this point, as his charm and charisma opened doors that I doubt she could have went through by herself.

Hillary's main message has been that she is most ready to takeover the job. I thnk it is completely legitimate. She does have a better idea of what the job entails than anyone running and she has the benefit of Bill being there as her Co-President. This is the biggest reason I have been swayed towards her. Considering the absolute disaster that the past 8 years have been, our country doesn't have the time for on the job training. While I don't agree with all of the Clinton's policies, I am confident in their track record and have a good idea of what Hillary's cabinet would look like.

While the concept of what Barack Obama would bring to the White House is exciting, I have a lot more questions with him. The idea that he would bring less partisanship to Washington is empty from my point of view, as his political record is more liberal than Hillary and he has done little in connecting with Republican politicians. This does not seem like a good recipe for bringing people together, especially when you add that many of these Senators see him as someone who has risen to stardom without having earned his political tenure. I don't think that should be a prerequisite, but I do think it will hamper him from the beginning in pushing through any real major policy changes.

It does seem like Obama will end up getting the nomination, but the race is close enough that Hillary has had every right to push the process through until all the states get a chance to vote. Unless McCain pulls back some from his Hawkish stance on Iraq, I just don't see the Democrat losing this election. Now if McCain did offer some type of plan which included a sensible exit strategy, I think he could be tough to beat, especially in these swing states where Obama has not connected with Hispanics, older voters and single moms.

I've been waiting for Obama to sell me on why I should want to support him, but as stirring as some of the rhetoric he offers up, I just can't get past the feeling that his coronation might be 4 to 8 years too early. I'm sure I will still vote for him, as McCain's war politics and keeping the Bush tax cuts permanent I believe will keep us going on the disastrous path we have been going towards this whole decade. I just think that in the place our country finds itself, Hillary Clinton provides a better bet to put us back on the right track. I guess this declaration will keep me from hainging out at Hollywood parties or get a gig writing for the Huffington Post, but I have to follow what my head tells me is right. I have a lot of elitist traits and have no problem being called on them, but I guess my childhood growing up the son of a poor millworker (oops, that is John Edwards stump speech) poor factory worker has left me with a populist spirit.